TECHNICAL PAPER

GREEN BELT BOUNDARY REVIEW ADDENDUM

DECEMBER 2015 Ashfield District Council Green Belt Review Addendum, 2015

Green Belt Boundary Review Addendum 2015

Introduction

The 2012 review of the Green Belt was undertaken in relation to boundaries around: • Hucknall and the south and east of Kirkby in Ashfield; • the villages inset in the Green Belt comprising Jacksdale, Selston, Underwood, Bestwood, Brinsley and New Annesley; and • Sherwood Business Park.

The aims of the review was to: a) To identify the locations of any existing anomalies to the Green Belt boundaries; and b) To assess whether there has been any change which constitutes exceptional circumstances and should result in an amendment to the Green Belt boundary.

The survey was not intended to review or identify locations adjacent to the Main Urban Areas or villages where development may be appropriate. Consequently, the survey does not consider circumstances where the Green Belt may need to be adjusted to accommodate development. This has been undertaken as a separate exercise when considering the development allocations and will form part of the Local Plan consultation. Ashfield District Council Green Belt Review Addendum, 2015

GREEN BELT AMENDMENTS

The following description, supporting explanation and plans identify the 2015 changes to the Green Belt boundaries.

HUCKNALL

H05/1 – Rear of Shortwood Avenue

The Green Belt boundary is to be amended so that it follows the Hucknall Bypass (A611). This is to accommodate a residential allocation to meet the long term housing needs of Hucknall. The A611 will provide a far more robust, defensible boundary in the long term.

The area will be protected under policy EV5: Protection of Green Spaces and Recreational Facilities. The area is important for several reasons including its effectiveness as a buffer between the existing development and the Hucknall Bypass (A611), and for its visual amenity within the built-up area.

H05/3 – Broomhill

The Green Belt boundary is to be amended so that it follows the Hucknall Bypass (A611). This is to accommodate a residential allocation to meet the long term housing needs of Hucknall.

This small parcel of land does not form part of the housing allocation, but it would be illogical to retain this area as Green Belt, as it no longer meets Green Belt purposes (as set out in the NPPF – shown on page 4 of this document). The A611 will provide a far more robust, defensible boundary in the long term.

Page 3 of 5

Ashfield District Council Green Belt Review Addendum, 2015

H05/4 – Broomhill Allotments

The Green Belt boundary is to be amended so that it follows the Hucknall Bypass (A611). This is to accommodate a residential allocation to meet the long term housing needs of Hucknall. The A611 will provide a far more robust, defensible boundary in the long term.

The allotments do not form part of the housing allocation, but it would be illogical to retain this area as Green Belt, as it no longer meets Green Belt purposes (as set out in the NPPF – shown on page 4 of this document). The allotments will be protected under Policy EV8: Provision and Protection of Allotments.

H05/5 – Rear of Nottingham Road

The Green Belt boundary is to be amended so that it follows the Hucknall Bypass (A611). This is to accommodate a residential allocation to meet the long term housing needs of Hucknall.

This small parcel of land does not form part of the housing allocation, but it would be illogical to retain this area as Green Belt, as it no longer meets Green Belt purposes (as set out in the NPPF – shown on page 4 of this document). The A611 will provide a far more robust, defensible boundary in the long term.

Page 4 of 5

Ashfield District Council Green Belt Review Addendum, 2015

SELSTON

S03/7 – Land off Meadow View

The existing Green Belt boundary is demarcated by a brook/drain in the majority of this area. However, the brook/drain has been re-directed and therefore there is no physical boundary on the ground. Furthermore, the land to the rear of the properties on Meadow View has been allocated for residential purposes to meet the long term housing needs of the rural area.

This small parcel of land does not form part of the housing allocation, but it would be illogical to retain this area of land as Green Belt, as it would no longer meets Green Belt purposes (as set out in the NPPF – shown on page 4 of this document).

Page 5 of 5